Star Trek vs. Star Wars

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lepanto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
star wars is my favorite, but ive just netflixed all 10 star trek movies to give ST another chance. ive only seen the first 4.
 
I like both-for different reasons. Star Wars is a roller coaster ride-don’t analyze it, just put your arms in the air on the big hill. Star Trek is more classic science fiction-it can and should make you think.

Two other shows in that vein are Babylon 5 and the new Battlestar Galactica.
 
I think the Star Wars prequels were designed to make you think–and that’s what was wrong with them! (That, and the dialogue needed some polish). They got too politically preachy, especially with the thinly veiled Bush paraphrase in ep 3.

In the DVD commentary for ep 2, Lucas said of Palpatine (I think around the time he tricked Jar-Jar into giving him emergency powers), “It wouldn’t be the first time a politician started a war to stay in office.” I wonder to whom he was referring?

I kinda agree with Steven Greydanus’s article (I forget the title; Search for Star Wars at Decentfilms.com) that mentioned that when Han Solo said “We don’t have time to discuss this in a committee,” it was a joke, but when Queen Amidala said it, she really was in a committee. It sucks the fun out of the adventure.
 
Instead of the Star Trek movies; I must say that it’s the TV series of Star Trek up to Voyager that I like. The showing of more recent ones has been sporadic and hard to follow. Voyager did that as well it would show a couple of episodes then start into reruns then eventually it moved completely to the SciFi channel which I didn’t get…that sure irritated me 🙂
 
linebyline said:
I think the Star Wars prequels were designed to make you think–and that’s what was wrong with them! (That, and the dialogue needed some polish). They got too politically preachy, especially with the thinly veiled Bush paraphrase in ep 3.
Click to expand...
That was more a reference to ancient Rome.
linebyline said:
In the DVD commentary for ep 2, Lucas said of Palpatine (I think around the time he tricked Jar-Jar into giving him emergency powers), “It wouldn’t be the first time a politician started a war to stay in office.” I wonder to whom he was referring?
Click to expand...
According to Lucas, Hitler.
 
Star Wars. Not even close:

I like Star Trek: Voyager and First Contact. What saved Star Trek was the Borg.

Can you imagine how boring Star Wars would have been without Darth Vader, Palpatine and the Death Star?

Star Wars movies, when adjusted for inflation, are in the Top 100 movies, for most money (Attack of the Clones was at 82) and not ONE of the Star Trek movies was in them.

Star Wars prequels weren’t as good as the original series but overall made a great series.

The problem with Star Trek was all the “time travel” that they did. If a Starfleet captain had a problem with a particular part of history, they could always change the time and redo it over.

Star Wars, was more real in that the past was the past and couldn’t be altered.

I was watching an interview with Mark Hamill last night and he said that during the filming of Star Wars (1977) people in studio wanted Chewbacca to have some pants on as they likened it to nudity. How stupid is that?

I suppose to those people Lassie would a porn film!!!
 
childofmary1143 said:
Star Wars movies, when adjusted for inflation, are in the Top 100 movies, for most money (Attack of the Clones was at 82) and not ONE of the Star Trek movies was in them.
Click to expand...
By the 23rd century, mankind has moved beyond the need for silly things like money. 😃
 
I couldn’t vote cause my choice isn’t on the poll…
SPACE BALLS!!! Better than either of the choices…😃
 
Lepanto said:
By the 23rd century, mankind has moved beyond the need for silly things like money. 😃
Click to expand...
The thing is with Star Trek that I dislike the most is that its the writers/directors view of future on Earth.

We travel to other planets. Great!
There is life on other planets. Okay.
Where is Catholicism? In Star Trek, the bible is only briefly mentioned and has been “refuted”.

Now in Star Wars, there is no Christianity either but one can take comfort in the doctrine of invincible ignorance that as “aliens” to Earth, they were never told!

Star Wars serves as a perfect escape from the realities of our lives here. That is WHY its so good! That and wicked lightsaber fighting.
 
childofmary1143 said:
I was watching an interview with Mark Hamill last night and he said that during the filming of Star Wars (1977) people in studio wanted Chewbacca to have some pants on as they likened it to nudity. How stupid is that?
Click to expand...
Oy! Chewbacca – Don’t get me started! :whacky:

How does he even have a name like Chewbacca? He can’t even pronounce it! Shouldn’t his name be something like Gargle-roar-gargle?

😛
tee
 
wabrams said:
That “thinly veiled Bush paraphrase”] was more a reference to ancient Rome.
Click to expand...
You mean, where Anakin/Vader said, “If you’re not with me, then you are against me”? Maybe it wasn’t intended to refer specifically to Bush’s remark to the effect that “You’re either with us or with the terrorists,” but Lucas would have to be an idiot not to think audience members wouldn’t make that connection.

You’re probably right; One of Lucas’s points (as far as I know) was that this kind of thing happens over and over in human history; he was probably referring to any or all of the historical figures who have used that line. Still, I think it’s heavy handed.

Incidentally, I think I figured out why the Jedi use sword-type weapons: Combined with a little Force auto-aim, they’re handy for deflecting blaster shots. Thus they can be used defensively. In theory, anyway; in practice, there’s an awful lot of lightsaber-induced dismemberment.

What’s a Tribble?
 
tee_eff_em said:
Oy! Chewbacca – Don’t get me started! :whacky:

How does he even have a name like Chewbacca? He can’t even pronounce it! Shouldn’t his name be something like Gargle-roar-gargle?

😛
tee
Click to expand...
Maybe that’s the closest you could come in pan-galactic or whatever they speak in the Lucasverse. Like the way in English we use “meow” for a cat noise – despite the fact that cats can’t pronounce an “m” – or for dogs, a “woof”, despite a similar inability to produce an “f”.

Maybe it’s actually correctly pronounced Gargle-roar-gargle, but just *spelled *“Chewbacca”, due to a weird Wookiee-pinyin Romanization. Like feng shui being pronounced “fung shway”, despite normal rules of orthography indicating it should be pronounced “feng shoo-ee”. Maybe the Wookiees decided that “Ch” is a certain back-throat gurgle, “wb” is a low thoracic growl, and “acca” means to hit you upside the head. 🤷
 
childofmary1143 said:
The problem with Star Trek was all the “time travel” that they did. If a Starfleet captain had a problem with a particular part of history, they could always change the time and redo it over.
Click to expand...
Or, as was really common in TNG and Voyager, fire the Particle-of-the-Week through the main deflector array (I swear, that thing had so many uses, it must have been made by Ginsu…)

Trek in its later incarnations relied too heavily on deus ex machina.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top